Request for Information on the J3400 Connector and Potential Options for Performance-Based Charging Standards, 16081-16084 [2024-04750]

Download as PDF ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 6, 2024 / Notices estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d) ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of the collected information. OMB Control Number: 2120–0661. Title: Competition Plans, Passenger Facility Charge. Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this collection. Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection. Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment period soliciting comments on the following collection of information was published on June 23, 2023 (88 FR 41184). This collection asks the public agencies to report on the availability of airport gates and related facilities, leasing and subleasing arrangements, gate-use requirements, gate-assignment policy, financial constraints, airport controls over air- and ground-side capacity, and whether the airport intends to build or acquire gates that would be used as common facilities. The DOT/FAA uses information submitted in response to this requirement to carry out the intent of §§ 40117(k) and 47106(f), which is to assure that a covered airport has, and implements, a plan to provide opportunities for competitive access by new entrant air carriers or air carriers seeking to expand. The information allows FAA to assess the competitive environment at airports and provide feedback to the airport on suggested improvements. Once an airport qualifies as covered the collection frequency is as follows: it is required to send its initial competition plan as soon as possible. Upon approval by the FAA of the initial competition plan, the public agency must submit two (2) competition plan updates, in 18-month intervals, while it remains a covered airport. Once an airport has submitted, and the FAA has approved, its initial competition plan and the subsequent two (2) updates, a competition plan is only required if the airport (1) has filed a competitive access report as required by Section 424 of Vision 100, codified as 49 U.S.C. 47107(s) stating it has denied access to an air carrier for gates or facilities within the last six months; or (2) is executing a new master lease and use agreement, or significantly amending a lease and use agreement, including an amendment due to use of PFC financing of gates. If an airport loses its status as a covered airport, no further competition plan updates are required unless or until the airport becomes covered again. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Mar 05, 2024 Jkt 262001 Respondents: Five (5) affected airports annually. Frequency: On occasion. Estimated Average Burden per Response: Approximately 150 hours. Estimated Total Annual Burden: Approximately 750 annually. Issued in Washington, DC, on February 29, 2024. David F. Cushing, Manager, Airports Financial Assistance Division, APP–500. [FR Doc. 2024–04681 Filed 3–5–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Highway Administration [Docket No. FHWA–2023–0054] Request for Information on the J3400 Connector and Potential Options for Performance-Based Charging Standards Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). ACTION: Notice; request for information (RFI). AGENCY: The FHWA issued regulations establishing minimum standards and requirements for certain electric vehicle (EV) chargers. Subsequent to the publication of this final rule, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) published a Technical Information Report for a new connector standard, known as J3400, which multiple automakers have announced an intention to adopt in the coming years. To ensure the effective implementation of programs that are subject to the minimum standards and requirements and to inform a potential update to the minimum standards, FHWA, in coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, is seeking additional information in five areas: on the expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and EV chargers; on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing regulations and safety considerations; on considerations regarding challenges and benefits of the implementation of J3400 at charging stations; on market demands for the continued availability of Combined Charging System (CCS) and J1772 connectors; and potential options for performance-based standards that can reduce the need for future regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves. SUMMARY: Comments must be received on or before April 5, 2024. Late-filed DATES: PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16081 comments will be considered to the extent practicable. ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions, please submit comments by only one of the following means: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for submitting comments; • Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, Washington, DC 20590; • Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202) 366–9329; • Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket number at the beginning of your comments. Except as described below under the heading ‘‘Confidential Business Information,’’ all submissions received, including any personal information provided, will be posted without change or alteration to www.regulations.gov. For more information, you may review the U.S. Department of Transportation’s complete Privacy Act Statement published in the Federal Register on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this notice, please contact Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA Office of Natural Environment, (202) 366–4287, or via email at suraiya.motsinger@dot.gov. For legal questions, please contact Ms. Dawn Horan, FHWA Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366–9615, or via email at Dawn.M.Horan@dot.gov. Office hours for FHWA are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Electronic Access and Filing A copy of this notice, all comments received on this notice, and all background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov using the docket number listed above. Electronic retrieval assistance and guidelines are also available at www.regulations.gov. An electronic copy of this document also may be downloaded from the Office of the Federal Register’s website at: www.FederalRegister.gov and the U.S. Government Publishing Office’s website at: www.GovInfo.gov. Confidential Business Information Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM 06MRN1 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 16082 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 6, 2024 / Notices information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to this notice contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and that is relevant or responsive to this notice, it is important that you clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. You may ask FHWA to give confidential treatment to information you give to the Agency by taking the following steps: (1) Mark each page of the original document submission containing CBI as ‘‘Confidential’’; (2) send FHWA, along with the original document, a second copy of the original document with the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the information you are submitting is CBI. The FHWA will protect confidential information complying with these requirements to the extent required under applicable law. Information collected in this RFI may also be shared with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation and Department of Energy (DOE) consistent with Congressional direction that the minimum standards and requirements for EV chargers be developed in coordination with DOE. The Joint Office of Energy and Transportation will protect any such shared information in accordance with applicable DOE standards. If DOT receives a FOIA request for the information that the applicant has marked in accordance with this notice, DOT will follow the procedures described in its FOIA regulations at 49 CFR 7.29. Only information that is marked in accordance with this notice and ultimately determined to be exempt from disclosure under FOIA and 49 CFR 7.29 will not be released to a requester or placed in the public docket of this notice. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to: Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, HICP–20, Washington, DC 20590 via mail, or suraiya.motsinger@ dot.gov via email. Any comment submissions that FHWA receives that are not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket for this matter. Background On February 28, 2023, FHWA published a final rule 1 establishing 1 On November 15, 2021, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) was enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), Public Law 117–58. To ensure standardization for a VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Mar 05, 2024 Jkt 262001 minimum standards and requirements for projects funded under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program and projects for the construction of publicly accessible electric vehicle (EV) chargers that are funded with funds made available under Title 23, United States Code, including any EV charging infrastructure project funded with Federal funds that is treated as a project on a Federal-aid highway. As outlined in statute, the purpose of the NEVI Formula Program is to ‘‘provide funding to States to strategically deploy EV charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability.’’ This purpose is satisfied by creating a convenient, affordable, reliable, and equitable network of chargers throughout the country. Prior to the establishment of this rule, there were no national standards for the installation, operation, or maintenance of EV charging stations, and wide disparities exist among EV charging stations. The final rule enables States or other designated recipients to implement federally funded charging station projects in a standardized fashion in order to build a convenient, accessible, reliable, and equitable charging network across the country that can be utilized by all EVs regardless of vehicle brand. Such standards provide reliable expectations for travel in an EV across and throughout the United States. As part of this rule, FHWA regulates the connector type used on EV chargers through 23 CFR 680.106(c) which states, ‘‘All charging connectors must meet applicable industry standards. Each Direct Current Fast Charger (DCFC) charging port must be capable of charging any Combined Charging System (CCS)-compliant vehicle and each DCFC charging port must have at least one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector. In addition, permanently attached CHAdeMO (www.chademo.com) connectors can be provided using only FY2022 NEVI Funds. Each Alternating Current (AC) Level 2 charging port must have a permanently attached J1772 connector and must charge any J1772-compliant vehicle.’’ The final rule allows permanently attached non-proprietary connectors to be provided on each charging port so long as each DCFC charging port has at least one permanently attached CCS Type 1 nationwide network of EV chargers, the BIL mandated the creation of a set of minimum standards and requirements for electric vehicle chargers which were finalized under 23 CFR 680 by FHWA on February 28, 2023, at 88 FR 12724. PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 connector and is capable of charging a CCS-compliant vehicle. Subsequent to the publication of 23 CFR part 680, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) published a Technical Information Report (TIR) 2 in December 2023 which provided information on the J3400 EV charging connector standard (also known as the North American Charging Standard Electric Vehicle Coupler). J3400 utilizes the same connector and pins for AC and DC charging; the publication of a new connector standard has implications for both vehicles and chargers. To date, J3400 has only been utilized in a proprietary implementation by one auto manufacturer and its charging network. However, several additional auto manufacturers have announced an intention to adopt J3400 with full vehicular integration beginning in 2025, and through adapters as early as 2024. Multiple charging equipment manufacturers have also publicly committed to adopting the J3400 connector on chargers. The FHWA, in coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, seeks information to better understand how the introduction and adoption of J3400 will impact the EV charging industry, automakers, and EV charging consumers and to inform potential updates to the minimum standards. To ensure FHWA has the most comprehensive and current information available, FHWA is specifically seeking detailed comments on the expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and EV chargers, on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing regulations, on considerations regarding challenges and benefits of the implementation of J3400 at charging stations, on market demands for the continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and on potential options for performance-based standards that can reduce the need for future regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves. The FHWA is also interested in obtaining more information on the impact of the publication of the J3400 TIR in order to assess how the minimum standards and requirements for EV charging can address the evolving needs of EV charging consumers and industry. The FHWA additionally requests information on what performance-based standards would best facilitate competition and innovation in EV markets, consistent with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs ‘‘Guidance on Accounting for 2 https://www.sae.org/news/2023/12/sae-j3400tir-released. E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM 06MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 6, 2024 / Notices Competition Effects When Developing and Analyzing Regulatory Actions.’’ 3 The term ‘‘performance-based standards’’ in this context refers to standards that specify a level of service and types of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific connectors. Request for Comments and Information To ensure the effective implementation of programs that are subject to the minimum standards and requirements, FHWA requests information from the public, auto manufacturers, charger manufacturers, and others involved with or impacted by EV charging regarding the impact of the publication of the J3400 TIR. The FHWA is seeking additional information in five areas: (1) on the expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and EV chargers, (2) on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing regulations and safety considerations, (3) on considerations regarding challenges and benefits of the implementation of J3400 at charging stations, (4) on market demands for the continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and (5) on options for performance-based standards. ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 1. Market Availability a. What is the expected commercial availability and timeframe of J3400 EVSE products such as connector and cable assemblies, EV chargers, and adapters? Please be as specific (to month/year, anticipated volumes) as possible. b. What safety standards will J3400 EVSE products need to be certified to and when will that certification occur? Are there any concerns with obtaining appropriate electrical and mechanical safety certifications for the J3400 connector? c. What is the commercial availability and timeframe of vehicles with (i) J3400 inlets, and (ii) 800V system architecture? Please be as specific (to month/year, anticipated volumes) as possible. d. Will future 800V vehicles be backwards compatible with 400V charging stations? If yes, for how long? e. What, if any, opportunities do you see to commercial availability and use of J3400 connectors and chargers? f. What, if any, barriers do you see to commercial availability and use of J3400 connectors and chargers? g. Is there existing domestic manufacturing capacity to meet 3 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/ uploads/2023/10/RegulatoryCompetition Guidance.pdf. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Mar 05, 2024 Jkt 262001 anticipated demand for J3400 connectors and chargers? If not, when do you expect this capacity to be available? How many companies have capability to ramp up production of J3400 ports, connectors, and/or adapters? h. How might the ownership and exercise of intellectual property rights impact the development of J3400 EVSE products? 2. Technical Compatibility With 23 CFR Part 680 a. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting the power delivery requirements in 23 CFR 680.106(d)? Please elaborate on these challenges with specific examples, data, etc. b. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting the interoperability requirements in 23 CFR 680.108? Are there any challenges with J3400 meeting other aspects of interoperability, including compatibility, safety, and performance of connectors/inlets/adapters, communications or security protocols, or support of vehicles designed to charge using CCS/J1772 connectors? Please elaborate on these challenges with specific examples, data, etc. c. Do you foresee any other challenges with J3400 meeting other existing requirements in 23 CFR part 680? Please elaborate on these challenges with specific examples, data, etc. d. Have any issues been identified or foreseen using a combined connector that accommodates both CCS Type 1 and J3400 connectors with one cable (as an example, combined connector designs such as Tesla’s Magic Dock)? Is there a difference in performance or durability between the use of a combined cable with multiple connectors and the use of two separate cables (each with their own connector)? Please comment specifically about power level and reliability. 3. Implementation Challenges and Benefits at Charging Stations a. Is there a need to include J3400 connectors on all federally-funded chargers? Is there a difference between the use of J3400 connectors for DCFC or AC Level 2 charging? b. Is it practical to retrofit an existing DCFC with a J3400 or other connector either in addition or as a replacement to an existing connector? What is the cost of installation to retrofit an existing charger with a J3400 or other connector in addition or as a replacement to an existing connector? Would retrofitted or added J3400 connectors on DCFC ports suffer from performance loss relative to PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 16083 natively installed CCS connectors? Are there other challenges with retrofitting an existing charger? If so, please describe challenges. c. What is the cost of a DCFC with a CCS Type 1 connector? What is the anticipated cost of a DCFC with a J3400 connector? What is the anticipated cost of a charger that provides both CCS Type 1 and J3400 at each port? Are there differences in maintenance considerations between these different types of DCFCs? d. What is the cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a J1772 connector? What is the anticipated cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a J3400 connector? What is the anticipated cost of a charger that provides both J1772 and J3400? Are there differences in maintenance considerations between these different types of AC Level 2 chargers? e. What, if any, equity-related challenges or benefits may result from use of J3400 connectors? What are the benefits or challenges for persons with disabilities between using J3400 and CCS/J1772 connectors? What strategies could increase those benefits or mitigate the challenges? If each charging station has a specified number of each type of connector (J3400 and CCS Type 1/ J1772), should accessible spots be required to have both connectors? f. What are workforce needs associated with retrofitting or installing chargers to be J3400 compatible and maintaining those chargers once installed? Will existing training and certification programs need to be updated or amended to cover J3400 installation, operations, and maintenance? g. Are there any compatibility, reliability, or safety concerns about charging vehicles that are designed to charge using CCS/J1772 connectors at new J3400 AC level 2 chargers or at J3400 DCFCs with an adapter? h. What are the challenges, if any, in ensuring that J3400 will utilize ISO15118 cyber physical security protections such as TLS authorization and authentication? 4. Market Demands for the Continued Availability of CCS, J1772, and J3400 Connectors a. Over time, what will be the expected continued demand for CCS/ J1772 connectors? b. Over time, what will be the expected market adoption of J3400 in new vehicle models? Please be specific in regard to the anticipated percentage of J3400 and CCS/J1772 vehicles by model year. c. Over time, what will be the expected demand for J3400 connectors? E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM 06MRN1 16084 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 45 / Wednesday, March 6, 2024 / Notices ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Are new connector types (other than CCS, J1772, and J3400) likely to enter the market? d. What is the anticipated useful life of the CCS, J1772, and J3400 connectors and cables that are currently in use (or that will be installed in the near future)? e. What is the expected impact of the TIR to the market for vehicle models that were manufactured to utilize CCS/ J1772 connectors? 5. Performance-Based Standards 4 a. If there is a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers, what are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based approaches? Approach 1: Include both J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772 connectors on each port. Approach 2: Include a specified number of each type of connector (J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772) at each charging station. Under Approach 2, what is the optimal ratio of J3400 connectors to CCS/J1772 connectors? Why? If there is not a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers, what are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based approaches to including J3400, CCS/J1772, or other connectors alongside cables? Approach 1: Provide at least one adapter for J3400 connectors at each charging station. Approach 2: Customers must provide their own adapters for use. Are there alternative design-based approaches to accommodate J3400 and CCS/J1772 equipped vehicles? b. Are there performance-based alternatives to specifying charging standards and communication standards (such as J3400, J1772, or ISO 15118) by reference that would support a convenient, affordable, reliable, and equitable EV charging network while reducing the need for future refinement to federal regulations? c. Which performance-based alternative (i.e., standards that specify a level of service and types of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific connectors) would best facilitate competition and innovation in EV markets? Which performance-based alternatives have the potential to harm competition, create consumer lock in, or otherwise erect or increase entry barriers? d. Should performance-based standards include requirements for achieving Key Performance Indicators 4 As noted above, the term ‘‘performance-based standards’’ in this context refers to standards that specify a level of service and types of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific connectors. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:57 Mar 05, 2024 Jkt 262001 most important to EV customers? If so, what should those Key Performance Indicators be? 6. Other Considerations a. Is there anything additionally that should be considered related to EV charging connector standards and technologies that is not covered in the above questions? b. Are there any supply chain issues for EVs and EVSEs related to support for 800V architectures? Shailen P. Bhatt, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration. [FR Doc. 2024–04750 Filed 3–5–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–22–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of the Secretary [DOT–OST–2024–0030] Advisory Committee on Transportation Equity (ACTE); Notice of Public Meeting Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation ACTION: Notice of public meeting. AGENCY: DOT OST announces a virtual meeting of ACTE’s Power of Community Subcommittee, which will take place via Zoom Webinar. DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, March 26, 2024, from 12:00 to 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time. Requests for accommodations because of a disability must be received by Tuesday, March 19. Requests to submit questions must be received no later than Tuesday, March 19. The registration form will close on Monday, March 25. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via Zoom webinar. Those members of the public who would like to participate virtually should go to https:// www.transportation.gov/mission/civilrights/advisory-committeetransportation-equity-meetingsmaterials to access the meeting, a detailed agenda for the entire meeting, meeting minutes, and additional information on ACTE and its activities. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra D. Norman, Senior Advisor and Designated Federal Officer, Departmental Office of Civil Rights, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, (804) 836–2893, ACTE@dot.gov. Any ACTE-related request or submissions should be sent via email to the point of contact listed above. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Background Purpose of the Committee ACTE was established to provide independent advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation about comprehensive, interdisciplinary issues related to civil rights and transportation equity in the planning, design, research, policy, and advocacy contexts from a variety of transportation equity practitioners and community leaders. Specifically, the Committee will provide advice and recommendations to inform the Department’s efforts to: Implement the Agency’s Equity Action Plan and Strategic Plan, helping to institutionalize equity into Agency programs, policies, regulations, and activities; Strengthen and establish partnerships with overburdened and underserved communities who have been historically underrepresented in the Department’s outreach and engagement, including those in rural and urban areas; Empower communities to have a meaningful voice in local and regional transportation decisions; and Ensure the compliance of Federal funding recipients with civil rights laws and nondiscrimination programs, policies, regulations, and activities. Meeting Agenda The agenda for the meeting will consist of: Welcome and Introductions History of ACTE Scope of Power of Community Subcommittee Review of existing recommendations Public engagement open discussion Next steps and closing remarks Meeting Participation Advance registration is required. Please register at https:// usdot.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/ WN_7LmQxZGmQCmO3V9UQpL-WQ by the deadline referenced in the DATES section. The meeting will be open to the public for its entirety. The U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to providing equal access to this meeting for all participants. If you need alternative formats or services because of a disability, such as sign language, interpretation, or other ancillary aids, please contact the point of contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Questions from the public will be answered during the public comment period only at the discretion of the ACTE Wealth Creation subcommittee co-chairs and designated Federal officer. Members of the public may submit written comments and E:\FR\FM\06MRN1.SGM 06MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 45 (Wednesday, March 6, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16081-16084]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-04750]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

[Docket No. FHWA-2023-0054]


Request for Information on the J3400 Connector and Potential 
Options for Performance-Based Charging Standards

AGENCY: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice; request for information (RFI).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The FHWA issued regulations establishing minimum standards and 
requirements for certain electric vehicle (EV) chargers. Subsequent to 
the publication of this final rule, the Society of Automotive Engineers 
(SAE) published a Technical Information Report for a new connector 
standard, known as J3400, which multiple automakers have announced an 
intention to adopt in the coming years. To ensure the effective 
implementation of programs that are subject to the minimum standards 
and requirements and to inform a potential update to the minimum 
standards, FHWA, in coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and 
Transportation, is seeking additional information in five areas: on the 
expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and 
EV chargers; on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing 
regulations and safety considerations; on considerations regarding 
challenges and benefits of the implementation of J3400 at charging 
stations; on market demands for the continued availability of Combined 
Charging System (CCS) and J1772 connectors; and potential options for 
performance-based standards that can reduce the need for future 
regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 5, 2024. Late-filed 
comments will be considered to the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: To ensure that you do not duplicate your docket submissions, 
please submit comments by only one of the following means:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to www.regulations.gov and 
follow the online instructions for submitting comments;
     Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590;
     Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m. E.T., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The 
telephone number is (202) 366-9329;
     Instructions: You must include the agency name and docket 
number at the beginning of your comments. Except as described below 
under the heading ``Confidential Business Information,'' all 
submissions received, including any personal information provided, will 
be posted without change or alteration to www.regulations.gov. For more 
information, you may review the U.S. Department of Transportation's 
complete Privacy Act Statement published in the Federal Register on 
April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions about this notice, 
please contact Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA Office of Natural 
Environment, (202) 366-4287, or via email at [email protected]. 
For legal questions, please contact Ms. Dawn Horan, FHWA Office of the 
Chief Counsel, (202) 366-9615, or via email at [email protected]. 
Office hours for FHWA are from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., E.T., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Electronic Access and Filing

    A copy of this notice, all comments received on this notice, and 
all background material may be viewed online at www.regulations.gov 
using the docket number listed above. Electronic retrieval assistance 
and guidelines are also available at www.regulations.gov. An electronic 
copy of this document also may be downloaded from the Office of the 
Federal Register's website at: www.FederalRegister.gov and the U.S. 
Government Publishing Office's website at: www.GovInfo.gov.

Confidential Business Information

    Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial

[[Page 16082]]

information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by 
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), 
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to 
this notice contain commercial or financial information that is 
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and 
that is relevant or responsive to this notice, it is important that you 
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI.
    You may ask FHWA to give confidential treatment to information you 
give to the Agency by taking the following steps: (1) Mark each page of 
the original document submission containing CBI as ``Confidential''; 
(2) send FHWA, along with the original document, a second copy of the 
original document with the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the 
information you are submitting is CBI. The FHWA will protect 
confidential information complying with these requirements to the 
extent required under applicable law. Information collected in this RFI 
may also be shared with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation 
and Department of Energy (DOE) consistent with Congressional direction 
that the minimum standards and requirements for EV chargers be 
developed in coordination with DOE. The Joint Office of Energy and 
Transportation will protect any such shared information in accordance 
with applicable DOE standards. If DOT receives a FOIA request for the 
information that the applicant has marked in accordance with this 
notice, DOT will follow the procedures described in its FOIA 
regulations at 49 CFR 7.29. Only information that is marked in 
accordance with this notice and ultimately determined to be exempt from 
disclosure under FOIA and 49 CFR 7.29 will not be released to a 
requester or placed in the public docket of this notice. Submissions 
containing CBI should be sent to: Ms. Suraiya Motsinger, FHWA, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE, HICP-20, Washington, DC 20590 via mail, or 
[email protected] via email. Any comment submissions that FHWA 
receives that are not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in 
the public docket for this matter.

Background

    On February 28, 2023, FHWA published a final rule \1\ establishing 
minimum standards and requirements for projects funded under the 
National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program and 
projects for the construction of publicly accessible electric vehicle 
(EV) chargers that are funded with funds made available under Title 23, 
United States Code, including any EV charging infrastructure project 
funded with Federal funds that is treated as a project on a Federal-aid 
highway. As outlined in statute, the purpose of the NEVI Formula 
Program is to ``provide funding to States to strategically deploy EV 
charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to 
facilitate data collection, access, and reliability.'' This purpose is 
satisfied by creating a convenient, affordable, reliable, and equitable 
network of chargers throughout the country. Prior to the establishment 
of this rule, there were no national standards for the installation, 
operation, or maintenance of EV charging stations, and wide disparities 
exist among EV charging stations. The final rule enables States or 
other designated recipients to implement federally funded charging 
station projects in a standardized fashion in order to build a 
convenient, accessible, reliable, and equitable charging network across 
the country that can be utilized by all EVs regardless of vehicle 
brand. Such standards provide reliable expectations for travel in an EV 
across and throughout the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On November 15, 2021, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law 
(BIL) was enacted as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
(IIJA), Public Law 117-58. To ensure standardization for a 
nationwide network of EV chargers, the BIL mandated the creation of 
a set of minimum standards and requirements for electric vehicle 
chargers which were finalized under 23 CFR 680 by FHWA on February 
28, 2023, at 88 FR 12724.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As part of this rule, FHWA regulates the connector type used on EV 
chargers through 23 CFR 680.106(c) which states, ``All charging 
connectors must meet applicable industry standards. Each Direct Current 
Fast Charger (DCFC) charging port must be capable of charging any 
Combined Charging System (CCS)-compliant vehicle and each DCFC charging 
port must have at least one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector. 
In addition, permanently attached CHAdeMO (www.chademo.com) connectors 
can be provided using only FY2022 NEVI Funds. Each Alternating Current 
(AC) Level 2 charging port must have a permanently attached J1772 
connector and must charge any J1772-compliant vehicle.'' The final rule 
allows permanently attached non-proprietary connectors to be provided 
on each charging port so long as each DCFC charging port has at least 
one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector and is capable of 
charging a CCS-compliant vehicle.
    Subsequent to the publication of 23 CFR part 680, the Society of 
Automotive Engineers (SAE) published a Technical Information Report 
(TIR) \2\ in December 2023 which provided information on the J3400 EV 
charging connector standard (also known as the North American Charging 
Standard Electric Vehicle Coupler). J3400 utilizes the same connector 
and pins for AC and DC charging; the publication of a new connector 
standard has implications for both vehicles and chargers. To date, 
J3400 has only been utilized in a proprietary implementation by one 
auto manufacturer and its charging network. However, several additional 
auto manufacturers have announced an intention to adopt J3400 with full 
vehicular integration beginning in 2025, and through adapters as early 
as 2024. Multiple charging equipment manufacturers have also publicly 
committed to adopting the J3400 connector on chargers. The FHWA, in 
coordination with the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, seeks 
information to better understand how the introduction and adoption of 
J3400 will impact the EV charging industry, automakers, and EV charging 
consumers and to inform potential updates to the minimum standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ https://www.sae.org/news/2023/12/sae-j3400-tir-released.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To ensure FHWA has the most comprehensive and current information 
available, FHWA is specifically seeking detailed comments on the 
expectations surrounding market availability for J3400 within EVs and 
EV chargers, on the technical compatibility of J3400 with existing 
regulations, on considerations regarding challenges and benefits of the 
implementation of J3400 at charging stations, on market demands for the 
continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and on potential 
options for performance-based standards that can reduce the need for 
future regulatory updates or changes as technology evolves. The FHWA is 
also interested in obtaining more information on the impact of the 
publication of the J3400 TIR in order to assess how the minimum 
standards and requirements for EV charging can address the evolving 
needs of EV charging consumers and industry.
    The FHWA additionally requests information on what performance-
based standards would best facilitate competition and innovation in EV 
markets, consistent with the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs ``Guidance on Accounting for

[[Page 16083]]

Competition Effects When Developing and Analyzing Regulatory Actions.'' 
\3\ The term ``performance-based standards'' in this context refers to 
standards that specify a level of service and types of vehicles a 
charger must support without specifying specific connectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/RegulatoryCompetitionGuidance.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Request for Comments and Information

    To ensure the effective implementation of programs that are subject 
to the minimum standards and requirements, FHWA requests information 
from the public, auto manufacturers, charger manufacturers, and others 
involved with or impacted by EV charging regarding the impact of the 
publication of the J3400 TIR. The FHWA is seeking additional 
information in five areas: (1) on the expectations surrounding market 
availability for J3400 within EVs and EV chargers, (2) on the technical 
compatibility of J3400 with existing regulations and safety 
considerations, (3) on considerations regarding challenges and benefits 
of the implementation of J3400 at charging stations, (4) on market 
demands for the continued availability of CCS and J1772 connectors, and 
(5) on options for performance-based standards.

1. Market Availability

    a. What is the expected commercial availability and timeframe of 
J3400 EVSE products such as connector and cable assemblies, EV 
chargers, and adapters? Please be as specific (to month/year, 
anticipated volumes) as possible.
    b. What safety standards will J3400 EVSE products need to be 
certified to and when will that certification occur? Are there any 
concerns with obtaining appropriate electrical and mechanical safety 
certifications for the J3400 connector?
    c. What is the commercial availability and timeframe of vehicles 
with (i) J3400 inlets, and (ii) 800V system architecture? Please be as 
specific (to month/year, anticipated volumes) as possible.
    d. Will future 800V vehicles be backwards compatible with 400V 
charging stations? If yes, for how long?
    e. What, if any, opportunities do you see to commercial 
availability and use of J3400 connectors and chargers?
    f. What, if any, barriers do you see to commercial availability and 
use of J3400 connectors and chargers?
    g. Is there existing domestic manufacturing capacity to meet 
anticipated demand for J3400 connectors and chargers? If not, when do 
you expect this capacity to be available? How many companies have 
capability to ramp up production of J3400 ports, connectors, and/or 
adapters?
    h. How might the ownership and exercise of intellectual property 
rights impact the development of J3400 EVSE products?

2. Technical Compatibility With 23 CFR Part 680

    a. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting 
the power delivery requirements in 23 CFR 680.106(d)? Please elaborate 
on these challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
    b. Do you foresee any challenges with J3400 specifically meeting 
the interoperability requirements in 23 CFR 680.108? Are there any 
challenges with J3400 meeting other aspects of interoperability, 
including compatibility, safety, and performance of connectors/inlets/
adapters, communications or security protocols, or support of vehicles 
designed to charge using CCS/J1772 connectors? Please elaborate on 
these challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
    c. Do you foresee any other challenges with J3400 meeting other 
existing requirements in 23 CFR part 680? Please elaborate on these 
challenges with specific examples, data, etc.
    d. Have any issues been identified or foreseen using a combined 
connector that accommodates both CCS Type 1 and J3400 connectors with 
one cable (as an example, combined connector designs such as Tesla's 
Magic Dock)? Is there a difference in performance or durability between 
the use of a combined cable with multiple connectors and the use of two 
separate cables (each with their own connector)? Please comment 
specifically about power level and reliability.

3. Implementation Challenges and Benefits at Charging Stations

    a. Is there a need to include J3400 connectors on all federally-
funded chargers? Is there a difference between the use of J3400 
connectors for DCFC or AC Level 2 charging?
    b. Is it practical to retrofit an existing DCFC with a J3400 or 
other connector either in addition or as a replacement to an existing 
connector? What is the cost of installation to retrofit an existing 
charger with a J3400 or other connector in addition or as a replacement 
to an existing connector? Would retrofitted or added J3400 connectors 
on DCFC ports suffer from performance loss relative to natively 
installed CCS connectors? Are there other challenges with retrofitting 
an existing charger? If so, please describe challenges.
    c. What is the cost of a DCFC with a CCS Type 1 connector? What is 
the anticipated cost of a DCFC with a J3400 connector? What is the 
anticipated cost of a charger that provides both CCS Type 1 and J3400 
at each port? Are there differences in maintenance considerations 
between these different types of DCFCs?
    d. What is the cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a J1772 
connector? What is the anticipated cost of an AC Level 2 charger with a 
J3400 connector? What is the anticipated cost of a charger that 
provides both J1772 and J3400? Are there differences in maintenance 
considerations between these different types of AC Level 2 chargers?
    e. What, if any, equity-related challenges or benefits may result 
from use of J3400 connectors? What are the benefits or challenges for 
persons with disabilities between using J3400 and CCS/J1772 connectors? 
What strategies could increase those benefits or mitigate the 
challenges? If each charging station has a specified number of each 
type of connector (J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772), should accessible spots 
be required to have both connectors?
    f. What are workforce needs associated with retrofitting or 
installing chargers to be J3400 compatible and maintaining those 
chargers once installed? Will existing training and certification 
programs need to be updated or amended to cover J3400 installation, 
operations, and maintenance?
    g. Are there any compatibility, reliability, or safety concerns 
about charging vehicles that are designed to charge using CCS/J1772 
connectors at new J3400 AC level 2 chargers or at J3400 DCFCs with an 
adapter?
    h. What are the challenges, if any, in ensuring that J3400 will 
utilize ISO15118 cyber physical security protections such as TLS 
authorization and authentication?

4. Market Demands for the Continued Availability of CCS, J1772, and 
J3400 Connectors

    a. Over time, what will be the expected continued demand for CCS/
J1772 connectors?
    b. Over time, what will be the expected market adoption of J3400 in 
new vehicle models? Please be specific in regard to the anticipated 
percentage of J3400 and CCS/J1772 vehicles by model year.
    c. Over time, what will be the expected demand for J3400 
connectors?

[[Page 16084]]

Are new connector types (other than CCS, J1772, and J3400) likely to 
enter the market?
    d. What is the anticipated useful life of the CCS, J1772, and J3400 
connectors and cables that are currently in use (or that will be 
installed in the near future)?
    e. What is the expected impact of the TIR to the market for vehicle 
models that were manufactured to utilize CCS/J1772 connectors?

5. Performance-Based Standards 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As noted above, the term ``performance-based standards'' in 
this context refers to standards that specify a level of service and 
types of vehicles a charger must support without specifying specific 
connectors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. If there is a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers, what 
are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based 
approaches?
    Approach 1: Include both J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772 connectors on 
each port.
    Approach 2: Include a specified number of each type of connector 
(J3400 and CCS Type 1/J1772) at each charging station.
    Under Approach 2, what is the optimal ratio of J3400 connectors to 
CCS/J1772 connectors? Why?
    If there is not a need to include J3400 connectors on chargers, 
what are the advantages and disadvantages of the following design-based 
approaches to including J3400, CCS/J1772, or other connectors alongside 
cables?
    Approach 1: Provide at least one adapter for J3400 connectors at 
each charging station.
    Approach 2: Customers must provide their own adapters for use.
    Are there alternative design-based approaches to accommodate J3400 
and CCS/J1772 equipped vehicles?
    b. Are there performance-based alternatives to specifying charging 
standards and communication standards (such as J3400, J1772, or ISO 
15118) by reference that would support a convenient, affordable, 
reliable, and equitable EV charging network while reducing the need for 
future refinement to federal regulations?
    c. Which performance-based alternative (i.e., standards that 
specify a level of service and types of vehicles a charger must support 
without specifying specific connectors) would best facilitate 
competition and innovation in EV markets? Which performance-based 
alternatives have the potential to harm competition, create consumer 
lock in, or otherwise erect or increase entry barriers?
    d. Should performance-based standards include requirements for 
achieving Key Performance Indicators most important to EV customers? If 
so, what should those Key Performance Indicators be?

6. Other Considerations

    a. Is there anything additionally that should be considered related 
to EV charging connector standards and technologies that is not covered 
in the above questions?
    b. Are there any supply chain issues for EVs and EVSEs related to 
support for 800V architectures?

Shailen P. Bhatt,
Administrator, Federal Highway Administration.
[FR Doc. 2024-04750 Filed 3-5-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.